ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT

374 ITR 108High Court2015#205 most cited

What is ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

When computing disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act using Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, only investments that have actually yielded exempt income during the relevant previous year are to be considered for the calculation.

364

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACB India Ltd v ACIT · Section 14A · Rule 8D · disallowance under Section 14A · expenditure for exempt income · investments yielding exempt income · computation of disallowance · Delhi High Court 374 ITR 108 · non-yielding investments · average investments Rule 8D

Also reported as

62 Taxmann.com 71235 Taxmann 22

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 1961Section 80ICSection 153DSection 132(1)Section 56(2)(x)

Issues it is cited on

section 153a proceedingsstrategic investmentsection 14a(2)section 80icdisallowance under section 14asection 115jb(2)section 56(2)(x)valuation of sharesdisallowance u/s 14asection 139(5)disallowance of interest expendituresection 92b

Judgments citing ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT

The Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

ITA 6512/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…provided in Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. This view of ours is further fortified by the decision of ITA No. 6512/Del/2013 ITA No. 1226 & 1227/Del/2015 M/s. The Hindustan Times Ltd Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd vs ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 (Del) and PCIT vs Caraf Builders & Constructions P Ltd reported in 414 ITR 122 (Del). 6.6. In view of the aforesaid observations, we hold that the ld. AO had not recorded any objective satisfaction having regard to the accounts of the assessee as to why the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee is incorrect. Respectfully following the decisi…

M/S. the Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for the Asst Year 2010-11

ITA 1629/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshm/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F M/S. The Hindustan Times Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 18-20, Kg Marg, New Delhi Circle-16(1), New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aaact4962F

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…provided in Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. This view of ours is further fortified by the decision of ITA No. 6512/Del/2013 ITA No. 1226 & 1227/Del/2015 M/s. The Hindustan Times Ltd Hon‟ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd vs ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 (Del) and PCIT vs Caraf Builders & Constructions P Ltd reported in 414 ITR 122 (Del). 6.6. In view of the aforesaid observations, we hold that the ld. AO had not recorded any objective satisfaction having regard to the accounts of the assessee as to why the suo moto disallowance made by the assessee is incorrect. Respectfully following the decisi…

Southern Petrochemical Industries Corporation Limited, Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward 3(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed accordingly

ITA 95/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.95/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Southern Petrochemical Income Tax Officer बनाम Industries Corporation Limited Corporate Ward-3(1) 88, Spic House, Mount Road, Guindy, Chennai-600 034. / Vs. Chennai-600 032. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacs-4668-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj Kumar Parida (Advocates)-Ld. Ars " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) & Shri Ar V Sreenivasan (Addl. Cit)-Ld. Drs सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10-01-2023 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan & Shri Saroj KumarFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) &
Section 14A

…have directed that disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) should be made only in respect of investments from which Dividend has actually been earned during the year. The Appellant relies on the following among other decisions: ACB India Ltd vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108 del. ACIT Vs VIREET INVESTMENT PVT LTD 165 ITD 0027 Del SB. 2.7 The CIT(A) / NFAC erred in relying on the Explanation to section 14A of the Act inserted vide Finance Act 2022 w.e.f 01.04.2022 to hold that sec 14A is applicable even if no exempt income has accrued the income is prospective in application and is not applicable for the year under ap…

Crisil Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 9(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result the issue under consideration is remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for statistical purpose

ITA 1114/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 133(6)Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO. 7603/MUM/2012 (A.Y: 2008-09) M/s. Crisil Limited v. Addl. CIT - 8(1) 8th Floor, Central Avenue Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai- 400020 Opp. D-Mart, Powai Mumbai- 400076 PAN: AAACT3151E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NO. 1564/MUM2014 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. Crisil Limited v. Dy. CIT (OSD) – 8(1) Central Avenue Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai- 400020 Opp. D-Mart, Powai Mumbai- 400076 PAN:…

Crisil Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) 8(1), Mumbai

In the result the issue under consideration is remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for statistical purpose

ITA 1564/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 133(6)Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO. 7603/MUM/2012 (A.Y: 2008-09) M/s. Crisil Limited v. Addl. CIT - 8(1) 8th Floor, Central Avenue Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai- 400020 Opp. D-Mart, Powai Mumbai- 400076 PAN: AAACT3151E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NO. 1564/MUM2014 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. Crisil Limited v. Dy. CIT (OSD) – 8(1) Central Avenue Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai- 400020 Opp. D-Mart, Powai Mumbai- 400076 PAN:…

Crisil Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result the issue under consideration is remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for statistical purpose

ITA 7603/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 133(6)Section 144C(5)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO. 7603/MUM/2012 (A.Y: 2008-09) M/s. Crisil Limited v. Addl. CIT - 8(1) 8th Floor, Central Avenue Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai- 400020 Opp. D-Mart, Powai Mumbai- 400076 PAN: AAACT3151E (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.NO. 1564/MUM2014 (A.Y: 2009-10) M/s. Crisil Limited v. Dy. CIT (OSD) – 8(1) Central Avenue Road Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Hiranandani Business Park Mumbai- 400020 Opp. D-Mart, Powai Mumbai- 400076 PAN:…

Bhartiya International Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2109/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144C(13)Section 14ASection 156

…22 (Del) (SLP dismissed by SC). It is well settled law that disallowance under Section 14A can be made only in respect of those investments which have yielded tax free income during the year as held in Caraf Builders (supra) and ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del). The AO is thus directed to delete the disallowance under Section 14A made over and above the disallowance offered by the assessee. 11.3 Ground No.3 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 12. Ground No.4 concerns additions of Rs.2,03,96,540/- on account of disallowance of ESOP expenses. 12.1 As per the draft assessment order, the AO o…

Indiabullas Housing Finance Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-6(4), Mumbai

ITA 821/MUM/2023[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Dec 2023AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal &For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Garg
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

…ssessing Officer to compute the amount of disallowance as per Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules by taking into account the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax : [2015] 374 ITR 108 (Delhi)[24-03- 2015] and the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. : 58 ITR (T) 313 (Del Trib.) (SB). 12.3. Both the Revenue and the Assessee are in appeal before us against the above order of the CIT(A). 12.4. In Ground No. i. raised by the Revenue, the Revenue has contended that the C…

ACIT(CC)-6(4), Mumbai vs. Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2683/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2683/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit(Cc)-6(4) बिधम/ Indiabulls Housing Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Finance Ltd Vs. Air India Building, Nariman M-62 & 63 1St Floor, Point, Mumbai-400021. Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabci3612A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri K. Gopal Revenue By: Shri Hemankumar Chimanlal Leuva (Cit-Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13/11/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/11/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Hemankumar Chimanlal Leuva
Section 14A

…hat yielded exempt income during the year only have to be considered and not the investment which did not yield any exempt income. And for such a preposition, we also rely on the decisions of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of ACB India Ltd. Vs. ACIT (374 ITR 108) (Del); and we find nothing wrong in the direction given by the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore, reiterate the direction of Ld. CIT(A) to assessee to submit before AO the value of investment which yielded exempt income and then the AO to compute disallowance u/s 14A of the Act taking average investment of those investment that have yielded the exempt in…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -2, Surat vs. M/S Aalidhar Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 226/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 80G

…of investment ITA Nos. 226/SRT/2023 & 288/SRT/2022/AYs.2017-18 & 2018-19 ACIT vs. Aalidhar Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd. or pay back is not expenditure incurred in term of Section 14A as has been held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ACB India Limited Vs ACIT, 374 ITR 108. 18. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited vs. DCIT, 394 ITR 449 (SC) held that object of Section 14A is to widen the theory of apportionment of expenditure and allow only that part of expenditure with relates to income forming part of total income as a deduction. Rule 8D prescribed method to be adopted. Before…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-2, Surat vs. Aalidhaara Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd, Surat

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 288/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Section 133(6)Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 80G

…of investment ITA Nos. 226/SRT/2023 & 288/SRT/2022/AYs.2017-18 & 2018-19 ACIT vs. Aalidhar Textool Engineers Pvt. Ltd. or pay back is not expenditure incurred in term of Section 14A as has been held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ACB India Limited Vs ACIT, 374 ITR 108. 18. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited vs. DCIT, 394 ITR 449 (SC) held that object of Section 14A is to widen the theory of apportionment of expenditure and allow only that part of expenditure with relates to income forming part of total income as a deduction. Rule 8D prescribed method to be adopted. Before…

M/S Pvr Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2143/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S. Pvr Ltd. Addl. Cit Range-14 New Delhi 61, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar Vs New Delhi-110057 Pan No.Aaacp4526D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 14ASection 43(1)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/s. PVR Ltd. Addl. CIT Range-14 New Delhi 61, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar Vs New Delhi-110057 PAN No.AAACP4526D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant Sh. Gaurav Jain, Advocate Sh. Sudarshan Roy, Advocate Sh. V.K. Garg, Advocate Sh. Parveen Kumar, CA Respondent Sh. P.N. Barnwal, CIT DR Date of Hearing 01.11.2023 Date of Pronouncement 07.11.2023 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT…

M/S. Bharat Electronics Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 394/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Bharat Electronics The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner Of Registered Office, Income Tax, Outer Ring Road Ltu, Nagawara, Circle – 1, Vs. Bangalore – 560 045. Bangalore. Pan: Aaacb5985C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Richa .B, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 43A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/s. Bharat Electronics The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner of Registered Office, Income Tax, Outer Ring Road LTU, Nagawara, Circle – 1, Vs. Bangalore – 560 045. Bangalore. PAN: AAACB5985C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Richa .B, CA Revenue by : Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 20-09-2023 Date of Pronouncement : 29-09-2023 ORDER PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the or…

M/S. Classic Citi Investments Private Limited, Pune vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 436/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Pune21 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 250

…g both, the investment in Equity shares of Diana that did not yield any exempt income and also investment in partnership firm that resulted into exempt income during the year under consideration. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ACB India Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del) has held that the average value of investments, for the purposes of Rule 8D(2)(iii), should be confined to those securities in respect of which exempt income is earned and not the total investments. Similar view has been taken by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investments (P) Ltd. (2017) 165 ITD 27 (Del)…

M/S. Classic Citi Investments Private Limited, Pune vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal for the A

ITA 435/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Pune21 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

Section 250

…g both, the investment in Equity shares of Diana that did not yield any exempt income and also investment in partnership firm that resulted into exempt income during the year under consideration. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ACB India Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del) has held that the average value of investments, for the purposes of Rule 8D(2)(iii), should be confined to those securities in respect of which exempt income is earned and not the total investments. Similar view has been taken by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investments (P) Ltd. (2017) 165 ITD 27 (Del)…

DCIT-CC-27, New Delhi vs. Anshika Consultants Pvt Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, Appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 35/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.” Cross Objection

Section 115JSection 136(6)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI BEFORE, SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s Anshika Dy. CIT Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle-27 Vs. 305, 3rd Floor New Delhi Bhanot Corner Pamposh Enclave Greater Kailash-I New Delhi-110 048 PAN-AAACA 0423A (Appellant) (Respondent) Cross Objection No.76/Del/2023 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015-16) Dy. CIT M/s Anshika Central Circle-27 Consultants Pvt. Ltd. Vs. New Delhi 305, 3rd Floor Bhanot Corner Pamposh Enclave Greater Kailash-I New Delhi-110 048 PAN-AAACA 0423A (Cross Objector) (Respondent) Appell…

Bmg Enterprises Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle 5(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 51/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmabmg Enterprises Ltd, Vs. Acit, First Floor, Dcm Building, Circle-5(1), 16, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacb4657R

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Girish Kohli, Sr. DR
Section 10(35)Section 143Section 14ASection 250

…no. 3 above, the Ld. AO and consequently the Ld. CIT(A) have grossly erred in law and on the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case in: a. disregarding the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd. [(2015) 374 ITR 108 (Delhi)] to consider only investments that earn or generate exempt income and not the total investments of the appellans computing the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act; b. not limiting the disallowances u/s 14A to the total exempt income earned of Rs. 1,03,155/- (dividend u/s 10(35)) by the assessee following the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Delhi High…

M/S. Bharat Electronics Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 395/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Ms. Richa B, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Aseem Sharma, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…e average investment value under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to be at Rs.11,98,11,000/- (being total Page 3 of 5 investments) is against the dictum laid down by the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd., Vs. ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108. It was submitted that only dividend earning investments should be considered in arriving at the average investment value under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules. 6. The learned DR strongly supported the order of the AO and the CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We are of the view that only investment…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-6(4), Mumbai vs. M/S Sinnar Thermal Power Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2444/MUM/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2023AY 2018-2019

Bench: Aby T Vakery & Shri Amarjit Singhdcit, Cc 6(4) Vs. M/S Sinnar Thermal Room No. 1925, 19Th Power Ltd. Floor, Air India Building, A150-151, Ground Floor, Nariman Point, K.H. No. 407, A Block, Mumbai-400021 Mahipalpur Extension New Delhi-110037 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh Rakh, DR
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14ASection 250Section 260A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE ABY T VAKERY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DCIT, CC 6(4) Vs. M/s Sinnar Thermal Room No. 1925, 19th Power Ltd. Floor, Air India Building, A150-151, Ground Floor, Nariman Point, K.H. No. 407, A Block, Mumbai-400021 Mahipalpur Extension New Delhi-110037 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, AR, Respondent by : Shri Ganesh Rakh, DR Date of Hearing 21.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement 31.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH :- 1. The present appeal filed by the…

Finolex Industries Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-Akurdi, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 839/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Hon. Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.Finolex Industries Limited, Vs Acit, Circle-9, Block No.D-1/10 Midc, Pune. Chinchwad, Pune-411019 Pan: Aaacf 2634 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S. Pathak, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde, Dr Date Of Hearing : 08/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 14/08/2023 O R D E R Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi, Dated 12.06.2023 For A.Y.2016-17 As Per The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. Pathak, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE „A‟ BENCHES :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, HON. VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, HON. JUDICIAL MEMBER Finolex Industries Limited, vs ACIT, Circle-9, Block No.D-1/10 MIDC, Pune. Chinchwad, Pune-411019 PAN: AAACF 2634 A Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Nikhil S. Pathak, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde, DR Date of hearing : 08/08/2023 Date of pronouncement : 14/08/2023 O R D E R Per PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, dated 12.06.2023 for…